Tools disrupting KM #state-of-KM #search #tools


Eudald Camprubi
 
Edited

Hi, 

My name is Eudald Camprubí, CEO at Flaps, we are a startup from Barcelona building an insight engine to help companies overcome information chaos. 
I've decided to write this post because we are looking for opinions about the future of KM, specially when it comes to software. 

I have some experience on enterprise search, but I really feel indexing all company's data is not useful, because ends up indexing a lot of non-relevant information and this generates a lot of "noise", so I truly believe that the trend will be just to index what is considered the key information of a company. What do you think about it? 
Do you think that the natural evolution of what we today understand as "enterprise search" will be "insight engines"? 

Thanks so much! 

PS: Just to let you know, this is the approach we are following to offer a much more "intelligent" analysis from documents and videos: https://www.loom.com/share/326f3a57a1b243388e53753522553e37



Nirmala Palaniappan
 

This is interesting, Eudald. Thanks!

I have been looking at how machine learning programmes can answer questions (as opposed to searching for keywords or phrases) and think that may be another substitute for conventional search. 

For example: An employee might log into the intranet and ask “Whom should I contact for information on <name of topic>” and the ML program might return a bunch of relevant answers based on the content in the Intranet and also lead to the documents that contain the rest of the information.

Regards
Nirmala 

On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 at 2:06 PM, Eudald Camprubi <eudald@...> wrote:

Hi, 

My name is Eudald Camprubí, CEO at Flaps, we are a startup from Barcelona building an insight engine to help companies overcome information chaos. 
I've decided to write this post because we are looking for opinions about the future of KM, specially when it comes to software. 

I have some experience on enterprise search, but I really feel indexing all company's data is not useful, because ends up indexing a lot of non-relevant information and this generates a lot of "noise", so I truly believe that the trend will be just to index what is considered the key information of a company. What do you think about it? 
Do you think that the natural evolution of what we today understand as "enterprise search" will be "insight engines"? 

Thanks so much! 

PD: Just to let you know, this is the approach we are following to offer a much more "intelligent" analysis form documentes and videos: https://www.loom.com/share/326f3a57a1b243388e53753522553e37


--
"The faithful see the invisible, believe the incredible and then receive the impossible" - Anonymous


Matt Moore
 

Eudald,

“I truly believe that the trend will be just to index what is considered the key information of a company”

So what do you think is considered the key information of a company?

Regards,

Matt Moore
+61 423 784 504

On Mar 23, 2021, at 7:36 PM, Eudald Camprubi <eudald@flaps.io> wrote:

I truly believe that the trend will be just to index what is considered the key information of a company


Dennis Thomas
 

Eudald,

Many people in KM consider data and information to be knowledge.  We believe that data and information  equates to only about 15% of knowledge.  The other 85% is the applied theory or rational intelligence that gives data it context, meaning, and purpose.  This is true for information too (PDF, Word Docs, PowerPoint presentations, etc.). Its all part of the info glut problem.  

Both manual and knowledge workers need to learn the how, why, and what-if knowledge related to the situations and circumstances of their work environment.   What good is more data and information if people don’t know how to use it?

Another huge and persistent problem is that if people cannot get the knowledge they need to do their jobs, they either invent what they need to do on their own, which may be wrong, or they put off doing anything.  On average, 5.3 hrs is lost per week as a direct result of not getting USEABLE knowledge they can apply.  So the idea of finding someone who can answer your question is slightly naive.  People are busy on their own projects. Research shows that 70% of workers complain about the availability of managers and coworkers being available to answer their questions.  

Many KMer’s think that AI, ML, NLP, holds the answer, but in reality, most adhere to the ideals of big business that can sfford their consulting fees.  There are 10s of millions of small and medium size companies that don’t have enough data to justify Machine Learning, or the money to pay for it.  Keep in mind that the bloom is off the rose because the failure rate of AI and ML programs is as high as 65% according to Forbes.  Industry people know that the failure rate is much higher.

My recommendation is to set your sites on a simple program that catalogues and indexes lessons-learned strategies, tasks, and processes that people can readily understand and use.  This practical approach might make more sense to you.  Remember, senior level programmers make $125 per hour.  They are like artists who are deeply experienced with the multitudes of platforms, open source software libraries, and utilities that they can integrate to save you money while delivering a FUNCTIONAL application.   Their personalities can be challenging, but if fairly treated and properly directed, you will get the result you want. 

Good luck! 
-- 
DL Thomas

On March 24, 2021 at 2:46:42 PM, Matt Moore (matt@...) wrote:

Eudald,

“I truly believe that the trend will be just to index what is considered the key information of a company”

So what do you think is considered the key information of a company?

Regards,

Matt Moore
+61 423 784 504
On Mar 23, 2021, at 7:36 PM, Eudald Camprubi <eudald@...> wrote:

I truly believe that the trend will be just to index what is considered the key information of a company






Peter-Anthony Glick
 

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 04:27 PM, Dennis Thomas wrote:
On average, 5.3 hrs is lost per week as a direct result of not getting USEABLE knowledge they can apply.  So the idea of finding someone who can answer your question is slightly naive.  People are busy on their own projects. Research shows that 70% of workers complain about the availability of managers and coworkers being available to answer their questions.  
Yes Dennis and the "lack of time to help" is a problem that collaborative cultures aim to fix.  In organisations where people are incentivised and rewarded for helping others, or in fact, put simply where helping others is understood to be part of everyone's job, knowledge sought is more often than not obtained (assuming it is internally held of course).
In such organisations Eudald, what you mostly need are good social networking software to connect people. 


Dennis Thomas
 

Peter,

Point well made.  Dennis Pearce writes about ESN (Enterprise Social Networks).  Though they have been around since 2010, they never really caught on. Perhaps now is the time. 

Dennis

On March 25, 2021 at 4:31:14 PM, Peter-Anthony Glick via groups.io (peteraglick@...) wrote:

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 04:27 PM, Dennis Thomas wrote:
On average, 5.3 hrs is lost per week as a direct result of not getting USEABLE knowledge they can apply.  So the idea of finding someone who can answer your question is slightly naive.  People are busy on their own projects. Research shows that 70% of workers complain about the availability of managers and coworkers being available to answer their questions.  
Yes Dennis and the "lack of time to help" is a problem that collaborative cultures aim to fix.  In organisations where people are incentivised and rewarded for helping others, or in fact, put simply where helping others is understood to be part of everyone's job, knowledge sought is more often than not obtained (assuming it is internally held of course).
In such organisations Eudald, what you mostly need are good social networking software to connect people. 


Peter-Anthony Glick
 
Edited

Dennis
These tools are common place in most organisations already.  Tools like Yammer, Jive, or Viva (Microsoft's latest).
But a tool does not make a culture by itself.  Tools can assist a culture transformation, facilitate the desired knowledge sharing behaviours.  Anyone who still believe that deploying the state of the art social networking/KM tool will generate a collaborative culture, is well very naive.


Tim Powell
 

I agree, Peter-Anthony.

 

Most organizations I encounter not only do not have true incentives to share knowledge – i.e., beyond corporate happy-talk – they have implicit dis-incentives to do so at the micro level.  “What’s in it for me?” “I barely have time to do my own job, let alone yours.”  “How can you assure me that you won’t just claim this knowledge as your own?” That sort of thing.

 

In such exchanges, the knowledge “seller” (the SME, for example) pays – not the basis for a stable transaction.  Technology doesn’t solve this problem -- it usually exacerbates it.  The true solution lies more in uniting people around a common purpose – i.e., it’s a leadership problem, not a technology one.

 

In my experience,

 

tp


TIM WOOD POWELL 
| President, The Knowledge Agency® Author, The Value of Knowledge |

New York City, USA | DIRECT/MOBILE +1.212.243.1200 |

SITE www.KnowledgeAgency.com | BLOG www.KnowledgeValueChain.com |

 

 

From: <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of "Peter-Anthony Glick via groups.io" <peteraglick@...>
Reply-To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Date: Friday, March 26, 2021 at 5:41 AM
To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Tools disrupting KM #data-science #case-studies #futureofwork #semantic-web #startup #state-of-km

 

Dennis
These tools are common place in most organisations already.  Tools like Yammer, Jives, or Viva Microsoft's latest.
But a tool does not make a culture by itself.  Tools can assist a culture transformation, facilitate the desired knowledge sharing behaviours.  Anyone who still believe that deploying the state of the art social networking/KM tool will generate a collaborative culture, is well very naive.    


Dennis Pearce
 

One of the benefits of developing a "working out loud" culture is that employees don't necessarily have to actively help others (although that would be wonderful), just work in a more open way.  For example, if I post to a discussion instead of sending an email, it's essentially the same amount of work for me but it makes a world of difference in terms of information sharing.  Platforms instead of channels wherever possible.